Abstract
We argue that the study of social complexity can follow two different approaches, based on how it is seen from the outside or on how it is experienced from within. Recent focus has been on the former with social complexity emerging from the interactions of group members. Here, we take the view from within and deal with the social complexity that individual group members may experience, exploring complexity arising from aspects of the social structure and social organization. We review a variety of sources of social complexity in terms of variation between and within social relationships, variation in opportunities to interact with different group members, and the role of third parties. We then examine how individuals can cope with the social complexity they face. We conclude that a refined view of social relationships at different levels is needed to study the social complexity faced by individual group members and emphasize the potential contribution of the view from within to the study of social complexity and cognition.Significance statementAnimals may experience different degrees of complexity in their social groups. Instead of viewing social complexity as an emergent property of the interactions exchanged by group members, we focus on the social complexity individual group members may experience. We examine how aspects of social structure and social organization, such as the variation between and within social relationships, the variation in opportunities to interact with different group members, and the role of third parties, could create challenges and sources of complexity for individual group members. We then evaluate how emotions and cognitive abilities could be used by animals of different species to navigate the social complexity they experience and make appropriate decisions. We show that there are neglected sources of social complexity related to social relationships that derive from them changing over time and consisting of different components. We conclude by emphasizing that a change in perspective is needed to study how cognition is linked to the social complexity individual group members may experience.
Highlights
There is no generally accepted definition of complexity (Chu et al 2003; Kappeler 2019, topical collection on Social complexity), there is a general consensus across disciplines that complexity emerges from the interaction of non-complex elements, which are non-identical and interact in different ways, often following simple rules (Nadel and Stein 1991; Bascompte and Solé 1995; Chialvo 2010; Johnson 2009)
We examine how aspects of social structure and social organization, such as the variation between and within social relationships, the variation in opportunities to interact with different group members, and the role of third parties, could create challenges and sources of complexity for individual group members
The approach we took in our review of various sources of social complexity provided a fresh look at several issues
Summary
There is no generally accepted definition of complexity (Chu et al 2003; Kappeler 2019, topical collection on Social complexity), there is a general consensus across disciplines that complexity emerges from the interaction of non-complex elements, which are non-identical and interact in different ways, often following simple rules (Nadel and Stein 1991; Bascompte and Solé 1995; Chialvo 2010; Johnson 2009). We can infer the dominance hierarchy of a group by the patterning of the dominance relationships between group members, which are based on the patterning of the dominance interactions (e.g., aggression, spatial displacements, submission, avoidance) between each pair of individuals (Hinde 1978) In this respect, the dominance hierarchy is an emergent property of the social interactions between group members, being a good example of social complexity viewed from the outside. As an extreme example of the differences between social complexity as viewed from the outside and social complexity as viewed from within, i.e., from the individual group member, we can consider the eusocial insects Their societies are often presented as extremely complex (Kapheim 2019; Kappeler 2019, both in topical collection on Social complexity).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
